1

Progressive Christians and Antisemitism:

From Arrogance to Ignorance on Israel & Palestine

Full Article

20 March 2019 Version

By Lisa Schirch

I am a progressive Christian Mennonite. My husband is Jewish, and my children are both Jewish

and Mennonite. We live in a rural area of the US, surrounded by homes and trucks flying

Confederate flags. There have been Nazi symbols drawn on the walls of my kids’ school

bathrooms. That use to be something I could shrug off. But now, antisemitic attacks against Jews

increased by 60 percent since 2016. An hour from my house, white nationalists with torches

marched in the streets of Charlottesville chanting “Jews will not replace us” to denounce Jewish

social justice goals. And the 2018 massacre at the synagogue in Pittsburgh came after a survey

indicating a fifth of young Americans have never heard of the Holocaust. I have new fears for

my family’s safety, and I think progressive Christians contribute to a culture of hate against

Jews.

Many Western Christians, both conservative and progressive, take an “either/or” approach to

Israel and Palestine. Almost everything written about Israel and Palestine is written with this

assumption: either you blindly support Israel, or you blindly support Palestinians. Either

criticism of Israeli policy toward Palestinians is automatically antisemitic, or there is no

antisemitism in pro-Palestinian advocacy. This either/or assumption is wrong.

Some seem to think compassion and listening to all sides is wrong, or somehow morally neutral.

They seem to think acknowledging the pain of both sides diminishes the side they favor.

Instead, we need more “both/and” thinking. It is possible to both support Palestinians and to pay

attention to antisemitism embedded in thousands of years of Christian culture and theology. It is

possible to both criticize Israeli policy and criticize Palestinian and Arab leadership. It is possible

to both pay attention to power imbalances and listen to the legitimate grievances of all sides. It is

possible to both pay attention to Jewish safety, trauma, and rights, and to Palestinian safety,

trauma, and rights.

Opposing Israeli policy against Palestinians is not antisemitic. But all too often, antisemitic

themes do accompany criticism of Israeli policy, and progressive Christians too easily dismiss

the idea that they participate in antisemitism. Just like racism manifests differently in the south

and the north in the US, so too does antisemitism look different among conservative and

progressive Christians. Progressive Christians are coming to terms that racism permeates our

culture and each one of us. So too must we recognize that antisemitism is pervasive.

Some progressive Christians demonstrate both arrogance and ignorance by simultaneously

insisting that they are not antisemitic without awareness of their own blind spots. As a

2

progressive Christian whose eyes were once blind, this article details the antisemitism I now see

amongst my own people.

This article begins by describing five blind spots most Christians have of Jews and Jewish

history and perspectives. It then identifies ten ways that progressive Christians contribute to

antisemitism. This list draws on interviews and lectures by a wide variety of Jewish activists,

scholars, and rabbis that I gathered over a three month period of living in Israel and Palestine in

2017. To contextualize the list, there is an introduction to my own background, antisemitism, and

the gaps in understanding within three broad approaches to Israel and Palestine found within

Western Christianity as expressed in North America and Europe: Christian Zionism,

Islamophobia, and progressive Christianity.

My Background

Over the last year, I have written a number of articles about Christian antisemitism. Mennonites

have had strong responses to me. Some have called for Mennonite institutions to cancel my

classes on any subject and banning everything I’ve ever written. Some have written sexist hate

mail, cursed at me in misogynist online rants, and told me to “shut up.” Some Mennonite pastors

denounced me arguing that antisemitism is not an important problem for the church to address.

Some think that I’m simply raising concerns about antisemitism because I am Islamophobic or

have a secret agenda against Palestinians. Some argue I’m just being used by Zionists and

advocating for some kind of naïve “immoral middle” that ignores injustice. Several Mennonites

reported me to Mennonite administrators, as if raising concerns about antisemitism itself was a

crime. For some reason, it is taboo for progressive Christians to talk about antisemitism.

Because of this very personal history, it is important to put this article in context of my

background. As a Mennonite, I have participated in and led advocacy for Palestinian rights for

over thirty years. I openly oppose Israeli occupation of the West Bank, the siege in Gaza, and the

treatment of Palestinian citizens of Israel as second-class citizens. I believe in the right of return

and/or restitution for Palestinian refugees, and in taking down the separation wall. I work toward

a shared future where both Jews and Palestinians have equal rights and freedom of movement. I

have worked and travelled all over the Middle East and Central Asia working primarily with

Muslims. I advocated for Palestinian rights at small White House consultations on the Middle

East peace process under the Obama Administration, I oversaw an Israel-Palestine Congressional

Briefing Series for two years to bring Palestinian and Israeli leaders to Congress, and I have

challenged Israeli policies on CNN and Fox News. I have dozens of Palestinian friends that I

talk to regularly.

But I am deeply critical of the ways progressive Christians, particularly Mennonites, Quakers,

United Church of Christ, and Presbyterians, relate to Jews and Israel.

My church institutions did well in teaching me about racism, colonialism, and Palestinian rights.

I heard dozens of sermons and talks on Palestinian rights. But I have never heard a sermon on

antisemitism, I was never taught the history of two thousand years of Christian persecution of

Jews, and I learned next to nothing about Judaism in church institutions. Then I learned

Mennonite church leaders suppressed the history of significant Mennonite participation in the

3

Holocaust and how Mennonite humanitarian groups rescued Russian Mennonites who had allied

themselves with Nazis. Some of those Mennonites went on to publish antisemitic newspapers in

the US and Canada, and wrote the White Man’s Bible, the foundational religious tract for white

supremacy in the US.

Some Mennonites cite the trauma Russian Mennonites suffered under the Red Army as

justification for their cooperation with Nazis, who were seen as saving them from Russian

violence. This is ironic given some Mennonites express little sympathy for and leave out the

story of Jewish history and trauma when they discuss Palestinian suffering.

Mennonites participated and supported antisemitism prior to and during WWII. And then

Mennonites moved directly into helping Palestinian refugees and denouncing Israel without any

concerted effort to help Jewish refugees or address systemic antisemitism in the church. Why

had so many Mennonite leaders suppressed this history over the last decades? Why hadn’t they

apologized to Jewish leaders?

Ten years ago, a Jewish friend charged me with antisemitism. I took her seriously. I thought

about it. I came back to her and said “I really don’t remember ever saying anything that is

antisemitic. I don’t remember hearing anything antisemitic growing up. I only remember hearing

positive references to Jews.” I was genuinely confused by her critique. She recalled her

experience at the university where I taught which hosted dozens of students from Lebanon,

Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Palestine and Israel during the 1990s and 2000s. Many of the Jewish and

Israeli students expressed their dismay that many of the Arab students would not talk to them,

and that faculty and staff seemed to ignore the isolation of Jewish students.

A Jewish rabbi who spoke on campus was called out by the president of the university to account

for Israeli policy toward Palestinians, as if all Jews automatically are responsible for the Israeli

government. After my department sent out a letter to all alumni expressing concern about the

Israeli violence in Gaza in 2009 and 2014, my Jewish friend inquired why the only mass emails

my department ever sent out had to do with denouncing and singling out Israeli aggression. Over

the years, I realized most of my Jewish colleagues expressed dismay about antisemitism, racism,

sexism, sexual abuse and other issues among Mennonites and wondered when Mennonites would

start to come to terms with their own problems instead of focusing much of their attention on the

problems with Israeli society.

When I had the opportunity to lead a group of college students to Israel and Palestine in 2017, I

took the opportunity to learn more about antisemitism as well as the Palestinian BDS movement.

In a 3-month block of time, my husband and I arranged to spend 6 weeks with Jews and 6 weeks

with Palestinians. In Palestine, we learned about Palestinian history, culture, and experience of

being second-class citizens in Israel and the occupation of the West Bank, and the siege on Gaza.

In Israel, we learned about Jewish history, culture, religion, and spent two weeks studying

Christian antisemitism with a variety of Jewish teachers and with the Bat Kol Institute for Jewish

Studies for Christians.

We saw firsthand the humiliating border checkpoints and treatment of Palestinians in the West

Bank and heard directly about the life threatening and desperate conditions in Gaza. We also

4

began to more fully understand Jewish concerns about antisemitism and how it affects

progressive Christians in our understanding of Israel and Palestine.

Before this trip I had never been exposed to training on antisemitism. As a Mennonite, I had the

opportunity to take dozens of trainings on racism, classism, Islamophobia, sexual abuse, and

sexism. I have heard more than two dozen sermons and church presentations on the plight of

Palestinians. But I have never heard a sermon on the history of Christian persecution of Jews.

The church colleges I attended taught me to analyze white superiority narratives, identify white

privilege, catch myself with white fragility, and recognize I have been raised in a racist society

and will always need to challenge racist assumptions within me. Why would Mennonites be

opposed to waking up to the antisemitism embedded in two thousand years of Christianity?

When white supremacists make threats toward Jews, they are talking about my family. When

conservative Christians assert a Christian Zionism in which the end times bring about the death

of all Jews, they are talking about my family. And when progressive Christians use narratives

that exclusively talk about Israel and Jews in a negative light, they threaten my family too.

Three Western Christian Approaches to Israel and Palestine

There are three main categories for how Western Christians approach Israel and Palestine:

Christian Zionism, Islamophobia, and Progressive Palestinian support. On both the left and the

right, there is a lack of understanding of Jewish perspectives, Judaism, Islam, and the Muslim

world. Western Christians often do harm with all three approaches in how they relate to Israel,

Palestinians and the wider Muslim world.

Christian Zionism is the belief that Jews must control the Holy Land in accordance with Biblical

prophecy to bring about Jesus’ return. Fundamentalist and Conservative Christians tend to

support the idea of Christian Zionism, which offers blanket support to Israel and either ignores or

denounces Palestinians’ claim to the land. This has been particularly hurtful to Palestinian

Christians. Christian Zionists tend to support Israel as a Jewish state as a necessary step in Jesus’

return. Many Christian Zionists believe Jews must exist in Israel up until the day they will all be

killed in the final days before Jesus returns, unless they convert to Christianity. This, of course, is

antisemitic.

Islamophobia is prejudice against Muslims. In general, Christians have little understanding of

Islam, misunderstand the core teachings of Islam, and are afraid of Muslims. Most Palestinians

are Muslim and experience the impacts of Islamophobia from Western Christians. The Western

media’s portrayal of Muslims and Islam as prone to terrorism has been particularly biased in

contrast to their treatment of white nationalists in Europe and the US. Western Christian

Islamophobia is an obstacle to understanding Palestinians and the wider Muslim world.

Progressive Christians articulate social justice as a core ethic. Progressives give attention to

racism, sexism, sexual abuse and strongly side with Palestinians in denouncing the Israeli siege

in Gaza and occupation of the West Bank. The problem of progressive Christians is not in our

care and concern for Palestinians, but what we do not say about Judaism, Jewish history, and

5

Israel. Some progressive Christians simply dismiss all critique of antisemitism as being a

justification of Israeli policy assuming that antisemitism is a politically charged excuse or

defense by those who want total, blind support for Israeli policy.

All three Western Christian narratives are obstacles to a just peace in Israel and Palestine. All of

them contain shades of white supremacy, a belief that white Christians are inherently superior

and “chosen” over others. None of these three approaches account for the role of Western

Christians in persecuting both Muslims and Jews. This article focuses on the third category,

progressive Christians, which is a much smaller group. Progressive Christians like to think they

are supporting peace and justice. But the progressive Christian approach to Israel and Palestine

slows progress toward a just solution for Palestinians and is blind in its own way.

While this article focuses on progressive Christians, there are five gaps found amongst

conservative and progressive forms of Christianity.

5 Gaps in Christian Understanding

1. Most Christians lack understanding of Judaism

Most Christians do not teach that Jesus was a Jewish rabbi. They do not teach about Judaism,

which was Jesus’ religion. They do not analyze the political and cultural factors that help explain

why early followers of Jesus separated from Judaism, even though Jesus was a devout Jew.

Today many Christians embrace supersessionist or “replacement theology” which asserts that

Christians replaced Jews in terms of their relationship with God. There is relatively little Jewish-

Christian dialogue either on theology, or on understandings of Zionism and Israel. Progressive

Christians are no different from Conservative or Fundamentalist Christians in terms of their lack

of engagement with or understanding of Judaism.

1. Most Christians lack awareness of Christian antisemitism

Few churches give sermons or offer training on antisemitism, or provide resources such as this

training guide on “Understanding Antisemitism” written by Jew for Economic and Racial

Justice. Most Christians do not understand the role of the church in two thousand years of

violence toward Jews. Many Christians still wrongly blame Jewish leaders, not the Romans, for

killing Jesus. Christians are widely ignorant about how the Christian church persecuted Jews for

centuries through refusing citizenship, imposing special taxes, forcing Jews to live in ghettos,

forcing Jews to convert to Christianity, and carrying out the Inquisition and pogroms. Few

Christians recognize the way wealthy Christians scapegoated Jews through centuries of

mythology. Few Christians acknowledge that Hitler drew on Church traditions and Christian

theology in designing the Holocaust. The Holocaust killed between 6 and 20 million Jews along

with Roma, LGBTQ and disabled people.

Many Christian denominations took part in the Holocaust, either by their active support for

Nazis, or their quiet complicity. For decades before the Holocaust, some Mennonites participated

in racial science. German scientists measured Mennonite noses and foreheads and used church

records to prove Mennonites were the purest Aryan race, the “anti-Jew.” Some Mennonite

6

theologians argued that Hitler was God’s messenger on earth, bringing about God’s kingdom.

Some Mennonites build barracks at concentration camps, used Jewish slave labor, and took the

belongings and homes of Jews forced to flee or who were taken away. Some Mennonites worked

directly for the Nazis, administering and carrying out executions in the Ukraine, where

Mennonites viewed Nazis as saviors from Russian persecution. The Mennonite humanitarian and

development agency MCC argued to the United Nations, that Mennonites, like Jews, were an

ethnic group that deserved its own nation. Some Mennonite Nazis were given Mennonite

passports to deceive immigration agents, who might have sent them back to the Ukraine and

certain death. These Mennonite refugees settled in Canada, Paraguay, and elsewhere. Some of

these Mennonites continued to spread their Nazi beliefs, including publishing antisemitic

newspapers and tracks supporting white supremacy. This is shocking to me, as these details were

not included in any of the Mennonite history books or courses I took growing up. And what is

more shocking yet is that Mennonite leaders in the US and Canada have deliberately tried to

cover up this history and to this date have failed to apologize or be accountable for this history.

The scale of persecution against Jews is distinct in terms of the length of time it has existed, the

geographic scope of persecution, and the level of killing of Jews. No other group in human

history has faced this amount of trauma.

1. Most Christians lack robust relationships with Jewish organizations

A few high-level forums for Christian-Jewish dialogue do exist. Following the Holocaust, the

Catholic Church and various Protestant denominations repented of antisemitic theology and

practice in the church and made important public statements. And at the local level, there are

some examples of Jewish-Christian dialogue and coordination in helping refugees and other

social justice work. But far and wide, most average Christians in Western countries have almost

no awareness of Jewish organizations, or Jewish social justice work. They also don’t know how

Jewish people think about the last two thousand years of Christian persecution of Jews or about

Israel today.

Some progressive Christians make lists of acceptable progressive Jewish groups based solely on

their stance on whether they support Palestinians and oppose the existence of the state of Israel.

Progressive Christians seem to value Jewish groups like Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) only

when they can be used to help the Palestinian cause. Progressive Christians blatantly take a

tokenistic approach, bringing out their Jewish friends from JVP to say “see, I can’t possibly be

antisemitic because I have this Jewish friend.” But strangely, progressive Christians rarely seem

to engage with anti-occupation Jewish peace groups that also support Jewish self-determination,

are far more connected with mainstream Judaism, and simultaneously support Palestinian rights

and Jewish rights.

1. Both conservative and progressive Christians listen primarily to one side:

Palestinians OR Jewish Israelis, and not BOTH.

Conservative Christians travel to Israel and Palestine to see the “Holy Land” without ever

encountering Palestinians and hearing only a simplistic pro-Israel narrative that affirms Christian

Zionism. But progressive Christians who travel to Israel and Palestine and primarily or only

7

listen to Palestinian narratives also emerge with simplistic narrative that demonizes Jews, only

seeing the Palestinian point of view. Some progressive Christians argue it is not necessary to

listen to Jewish voices, equating listening to Jews as condoning Israeli policy toward

Palestinians. Some progressives do visit with some Jewish Israelis, but they often only meet with

extremist Jewish settlers who reinforce an enemy image, or with Israeli peaceniks working

against occupation. Neither is representative of mainstream Judaism. And sometimes progressive

Christians seem to visit a token Jewish representative only to fend off criticisms of antisemitism,

rather than engaging in earnest dialogue with diverse Jewish voices and an agenda to understand,

for example Jews who fled persecution in Arab countries to come to Israel. These Mizrahi and

Sephardic Jews make up over half of the population of Israel. Yet many progressive Christians

routinely use a narrative emphasizing the white European Ashkenazi Jews who are viewed in

progressive Christian materials as “settler colonialists” rather than refugees or Jews with a

legitimate tie to the land.

1. Some progressive Christian church agencies work primarily with Palestinians, with

far less contact with Jewish Israelis.

Quakers, Mennonites and Presbyterian mission and service agencies have all worked with

Palestinian refugees and Palestinian Christians since 1948. This is important and necessary work.

However, the building of extensive relationships in Palestine has not been accompanied by the

same robust effort to understand Jewish points of view, or to establish relationships with Jewish

organizations. For example, Mennonites have been active in Palestine in the following four

areas:

1. Humanitarian aid and development programming to support Palestinians.

2. Justice advocacy programming related primarily to Palestinian liberation.

3. Learning tours to expose Mennonites primarily to Christian Palestinian suffering and

biblical historical sites.

4. Evangelical programming related to missionizing with the aim of conversion of Jews or

Muslims to Christianity.

While Mennonite work includes some collaboration with Jewish organizations, this is mostly to

support Palestinian humanitarian aid or liberation, rather than to understand Judaism,

antisemitism or Israeli society in its own right.

Antisemitism and Trauma

These five gaps among progressive and conservative Christians creates a foundation upon which

antisemitism can thrive in a variety of manifestations.

Antisemitism is the irrational fear of, hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a

religious, ethnic, or racial group. Antisemitism precedes modern notions of race and racism. Like

other “isms” it involves a projection of negative characteristics onto one group of people.

Antisemitism, racism and Islamophobia all come from the same source: the ideology of white

supremacy.

8

Antisemitism, like racism and sexism, can create a sense of trauma for those experiencing it. A

trauma is an emotional wound that produces feelings of fear, anxiety, lack of control, and a sense

of threat to one’s identity or life. A trauma trigger is something that is said or done that

stimulates a response based on an earlier trauma. When people experience trauma, it impacts

their ability to respond. It often causes a defensive reaction rather than an openness or

willingness to learn from others. Trauma sensitivity is an approach that recognizes the significant

impact that trauma has on the way an individual and a society thinks and behaves and attempts to

avoid stimulating the fear and anxiety based on past trauma. A trauma-informed approach

anticipates trauma triggers and attempts to relieve the fear or anxiety based on past trauma by

affirming a group’s safety and identity.

When Jewish people hear Christians – or any group - disregarding Jewish lives, trauma, and

safety concerns; speaking in exclusively negative terms about Israel and Jews; accusing Jews of

fabricating religious ties to the land; or focusing only or mostly on Israel’s wrongdoing or

obstacles to peace while ignoring other states’ records on human rights, many view these

narratives as antisemitic.

It is unfair to assume all critique of Israeli policy is antisemitic. It is also unfair to assume that

there is no antisemitism in critique of Israel. Many Jews describe the difference between

legitimate criticism of Israeli policy, and antisemitic attacks on Jews. For example, Rabbi Jill

Jacobs, the executive director of T’ruah, a Jewish organization dedicated to protecting human

rights in the US, in Israel and in the occupied Palestinian territories explains how to support

Palestinian rights without slipping into antisemitism in her important article How to tell when

criticism of Israel is actually anti-Semitism.

The 3D test of antisemitism distinguishes legitimate criticism of Israel from antisemitism with a

framework published in the Jewish Political Studies Review in 2004.[4] The three Ds stand for:

• Delegitimization of Israel and the right to self-determination by offering little or no

acknowledgement of Jewish history, suffering, trauma or connection with Biblical lands

and posing Israel strictly as a “settler colonial” project where white Europeans came

voluntarily to take Indigenous land rather than as refugees and people escaping

persecution. Delegitimization also occurs when groups support Palestinian self-

determination and statehood but refuse to formally recognize the State of Israel or

disavow Jewish rights to self-determination.

• Demonization of Israel by using stereotypes of Jews such as the idea of a “Jewish

conspiracy” to control the media, economy, or the world; the common use of the term

“Jewing” to describe taking advantage of others financially; presenting Jews exclusively

as oppressors, not as victims, while presenting Palestinians and other Arabs exclusively

as victims, not ever as oppressors. Demonization of Israel also relates to failing to

acknowledge Christian, Arab or Muslim persecution of other Muslims, Palestinians,

Jews, or Israel. Christians and Muslims have killed about 100 times more Muslims than

have Jews in Israel.

9

• Using Double standards to judge Israeli actions, without explanation on the criteria of

why progressive Christians pass resolutions and set up committees devoted to

denouncing Israeli wrongdoing and Jewish settler aggression against Palestinians when

no such resolutions or committees are formed on other humanitarian crises and conflicts

such as those in Yemen, the DRC, Iraq, Syria or Afghanistan. It also describes the

frustration that Palestinian leaders’ both sanction and reward families of those who kill

Jewish Israelis. And other Arab countries have also killed and persecuted Palestinians.

For example, 4000 Palestinians were killed by Syria in the last few years, Lebanon was

the site of a massacre of Palestinians, Egypt denies entrance to people from Gaza, and

Jordan took over the land set aside for Palestine prior to 1967.

In reviewing Christian narratives about Jews and Israel, it is important to keep these

understandings of antisemitism and trauma triggers in mind.

Dealing with Over-Use of Antisemitism Charges and Power Imbalances

Several factors contribute to a progressive culture that dismisses antisemitism charges.

First, the overuse and abuse of antisemitism to critique any support for Palestinians is wrong and

creates a dynamic where some dismiss the whole concept of antisemitism. Caring for Palestinian

rights is not antisemitic. These false accusations are an obstacle to a just peace.

Second, some dismiss the concept of antisemitism because they view Jews in North America as

“white” and benefitting from the powerful system of white supremacy. Jews are not all “white.”

Most Jews are of Mizrahi and Sephardic origin from Africa and the Middle East. Less than half

the Jews in Israel are of European Ashkenazi origin. In North America, some Jews may be

treated as part of the white majority. But both white Jews and Jews of color are also treated as

non-whites. In some places, Jews are treated similarly to other minority groups like African

American, Latino or Asian.

Both the left and the right hold false narratives of Jewish power. Most wealthy people in the US

and the world are Christian. A small percentage of Jews compose a small minority of wealthy

people. Christians control most of the world’s major media and political outlets. Yet Christians

and the mythology of white supremacy use antisemitic tropes to scapegoat Jews for economic,

political and social problems. Antisemitism has a long complex history. It is important to

recognize how the ideology of white supremacy uses antisemitism to scapegoat and divide social

justice movements.

Those who dismiss antisemitism often neglect to understand Jewish persecution in the US, and

Jewish social justice leadership to support multiculturalism, immigration, and civil rights. Most

Christians don’t understand how antisemitism preceded and justifies racism toward people of

color today. And few understand that white nationalists target Jews specifically because they

view Jews as a race that orchestrates multiculturalism and democracy, the values they oppose.

White nationalists in the US blame Jews for all the multiculturalism, human rights, and

democracy that they hate, as detailed by African American activist Erik Ward in his article on

how antisemitism animates white nationalism.

10

And third, some dismiss the concept antisemitism because they simply do not understand the

history of antisemitism and lack an awareness of Jewish analysis and discussion on these issues.

Just like racism and sexism manifests in many different ways, antisemitism also includes

microaggressions which are more subtle verbal and nonverbal snubs and insults against a group

of people. The shades of antisemitism among progressive Christians are often microaggressions

that are difficult for people to see because they have not had the opportunity to study the history

of antisemitism and develop a sensitivity to the patterns of its oppression. It is important for all

people, especially progressive Christians, to correct their ignorance of the history of

antisemitism. Jews for Social and Economic Justice have published a resource guide on

“Understanding Antisemitism” that provides an important foundation for this study.

Ten Shades of Antisemitism in Progressive Christian Rhetoric on Israel & Palestine

With this background in mind, there are ten ways that progressive Christians contribute to

antisemitism as they talk about Israel and Palestine.

1. Some Progressive Christians pay little attention to Jewish history and trauma.

Progressive Christians writing about Israel and Palestine often devote only a sentence or two to

Jewish history and offer little to no information about refugees from the Holocaust or the

pogroms, or the threats toward Jews in surrounding Arab countries. See for example the

Mennonite Palestine Israel Network or the Quaker Palestine Israel Network. Both networks are

run by advisory groups with extensive Palestinian connections. At least with MennoPin, the

advisory team members list little or no Jewish connections. But given that the Holocaust took

place just before the Nakba, it is difficult to understand the lack of attention by Christians to

nearly two thousand years of Christian persecution of Jews.

Progressive Christians tend to focus on the Jewish violence toward Palestinians, but not the

Christian and Muslim violence toward Jews that preceded it or that continues today. Books,

videos, and websites by Mennonites, Quakers and Presbyterians, for example, devote most of the

time and space talking about Palestinian refugees and Palestinian trauma from occupation and

the Gaza siege.

These are helpful resources to counter the mainstream media’s neglect of Palestinian history and

provide important information about Palestinians. But by obscuring, misportraying and ignoring

Jewish history and perspectives, these resources are obstacles to the goal of a just peace.

It is important to understand that there were strong colonial aspects to Zionism and the creation

of Israel, and that the Jewish settlements today continue in this tradition of settler colonialism.

Israelis have wrongly attempted to delegitimize Palestinian history and justify removal of

Palestinians by insisting there were very few people living in Palestine. But when progressive

Christians speak of Jews living in Israel as only colonialists, this is a way of silencing their

history of dispossession of their homes and land in Europe and other Muslim countries, or their

valid connection to the land to which they prayed for return every year during Passover. Erasing

the history of either Jews or Palestinians as wrong. All have a legitimate history of connection to

the land, and story of dispossession and trauma.

11

Progressive Christian resources and web pages often lament the 700,000 Palestinians who lost

their home in the Nakba, but often do not mention the 800,000 Jews who fled their homes in

surrounding Arab countries. Many progressive Christians know about the terrible Israeli

massacre at Deir Yassin of Palestinians. But few progressive Christians know Jewish stories of

massacres from Arab forces. Kibbutz Yad Mordechai was settled by the children who survived

the Warsaw Ghetto uprising in Poland. They were refugees seeking safety. When Egyptian tanks

began shooting cannons into their community in 1948, those early Zionists were viewing their

fight for survival against a world that hated Jews, not as colonialists fighting against Indigenous

people.

While trauma does not justify violence, it does help to understand it. Progressive Christians show

compassion for Palestinian trauma and understand Palestinian violence as part of a larger cycle

of violence. Some Israelis view this as justifying terrorism. Yet progressives rarely acknowledge

Jewish trauma or seek to understand Israeli policy within a broader cycle of violence. Some

progressives dismiss or belittle Jewish trauma. I cannot count how many times I have heard a

Mennonite or Quaker speaker on Palestine openly dismiss Jewish trauma and concerns for

safety. This is deeply offensive. And this is a double standard, as Palestinians are often

portrayed as completely innocent, and their violence is seen as justified and understandable,

while Israeli violence is seen as unjustifiable.

Some argue that when Western Christians “wring their hands with guilt over the Holocaust” this

is simply a way of justifying Israeli aggression or distracting from the Palestinian cause. I can

understand why Palestinians are tired of hearing about the Holocaust. They were not responsible

for it, and they have suffered immensely because of it. Some Palestinians feel angry that Western

guilt over the Holocaust seems to “tie the hands” of Christians to do something about the

suffering of Palestinians today. Their frustration is justified. Western Christians should care

about Palestinians as part of a wider social justice ethic. But attempting to support Palestinian

rights by ignoring Jewish trauma and safety is counterproductive and antisemitic.

Some Palestinians have gone on tours of the concentration camps in Europe. They have listened

to Holocaust survivors. They have a greater understanding of the Holocaust, the pogroms, the

Inquisition, and the centuries of persecution against Jews. These Palestinians recognize that

acknowledging Jewish trauma is not a distraction from finding justice for Palestinians. Trauma

sensitivity is an essential part of the solution.

2. Some Progressive Christians ignore Jewish points of view on Israel and Zionism.

Zionism means different things to different people. To many Jews, Zionism is simply the right

for Jews to self-determination and safety after millennia of persecution. But to most Palestinians,

the term Zionism is equated with the forced dispossession and military occupation of Palestine.

While there are certainly many Jews who believe that Jewish self-determination requires

militarily controlling all of the land of Palestine, there are many who do not.

Conflating the term Zionism with military occupation obscures possibilities for a just peace. For

many Jews, Jewish self-determination can coexist with Palestinian self-determination and

Zionism is not incompatible with Palestinian rights. Anti-occupation Jewish groups like J Street,

12

Americans for Peace Now, If Not Now, Breaking the Silence, and Gush Shalom articulate this

vision, but progressive Christians rarely cite these groups. Jewish religious leaders debate

definitions of Zionism, with some leaders arguing against military domination by saying “the

land does not belong to Jews, but rather Jews belong to the land.” The possibility of a shared

vision for a shared future are undermined by simplistic and dismissive definitions of Zionism.

Too often progressive Christians fail to understand and acknowledge Jewish views on

Zionism. For example, in the Presbyterian Church’s Israel/Palestine Mission Network, their

publication “Zionism Unsettled” equates Zionism with military oppression of Palestinians. The

diversity of Jewish views on Zionism are ignored, silenced or dismissed. Jewish leaders widely

condemned the Presbyterian Church’s publication of the document, and it was removed from the

main church’s website. One Jewish leader said this about the Presbyterian effort, “they had no

intention of encouraging thoughtful reflection on Zionism, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, or

Jewish perspectives on Israel. Instead, reductive and divisive thinking of this kind exacerbates

polarization and intolerance, both of which are not in short supply in this conflict.”

3. Some Progressive Christians tend to place all the blame on Israel, while ignoring

Palestinian and other countries’ contributions to the conflict.

Many progressive Christians appear to believe that Israel holds all the blame for the current

situation. Palestinian and other Arab leaders are often portrayed as victims. There is little

awareness of massacres and threats from Arab countries toward Israel, or corruption within

Palestinian leadership. And there is little acknowledgment of Palestinian suffering and massacres

in Lebanon, Jordan and Syria carried out by Christian and Muslim groups. In the last several

years, the Syrian government has killed nearly 4000 Palestinians in Syria. But attacks on

Palestinians by Arab countries rarely receive public condemnation. Quakers and Mennonites did

not mention these massacres on their advocacy websites. Why not? Are these websites concerned

about Palestinian well-being only when Jews are perpetrating violence? In 2014, over 1,700

rabbis sent an open letter to the Presbyterian Church stating that “placing all the blame on one

party, when both bear responsibility, increases conflict and division instead of promoting peace.”

4. Some Progressive Christians use Israel as a placeholder for the concept of evil.

Progressive Christians make almost no positive statements about Israel, or the meaning of Israel

to Jews. The Mennonite Palestine Israel Network and the Quaker Palestine Israel Network are

only about “Israel” in a negative sense; in denouncing Israeli policy. There is nothing positive

said about Jews or Israel anywhere on these websites. And in the Presbyterian and Mennonite

Study Guide on Kairos Palestine, Jews are exclusively portrayed negatively.

Progressive Christians argue that they are only criticizing the state, not the Jewish people. But in

practice, some progressives hold any Jew accountable for Israeli policies, as if they themselves

are responsible for the policy. Most Jews view Israel as a symbol of their collective identity, but

that does not mean they agree with all Israeli policies. When progressives portray Israel as only

a colonial, oppressive power, with no mention of the accomplishments and complexity of Israeli

society, this is dehumanizing. Too often progressive Christians detail the rich beauty of

Palestinian culture and society, but there is no mention of Israeli culture and society and no

13

mention of Israeli innovations in humanitarian aid, green energy or desalination. In my

experience in public settings with Quakers, Presbyterians and Mennonites, any positive

statement about Israel is quickly countered by someone in the audience condemning Israeli

policy toward Palestinians. For many progressives, Israel is equated in its entirety with

occupation and oppression of Palestinians. The term “Israel” is used only as a placeholder for the

concept of evil. This is dehumanizing and also a double standard. While the US military is also

occupying several countries, progressive Christians continue to engage with positive aspects of

US society and culture and do not boycott or condemn the US in its entirety.

5. Some Progressive Christians draw on antisemitic tropes when talking about Israel.

Many progressive Christians recognize that racism is part of our culture and that it shapes our

lives and interactions every day. Racism is not simply manifested in slavery, lynchings, or

explicit name-calling demeaning the humanity of people of color. Racism often manifests in

microaggressions that unintentionally demean and dehumanize a group of people. But

recognizing the sophisticated and subtle manifestations of racism among Western progressive

Christians has not yet come to our understanding of antisemitism.

Some progressives dismiss antisemitism because they point to Jews in positions of privilege. A

minority of German Jews in Nazi Germany were wealthy. Most of the small jewish population in

Germany was middle class. Wealth has never exempted Jews from persecution. And half of all

Jews in Israel today are people of color, coming not from Europe but the Arab and Muslim world

where many lost their homes and businesses to persecution.

Progressives lacking education and sensitivity to antisemitism also unwittingly use antisemitic

tropes. For example, newly elected progressive Congresswoman Ilhan Omar tweeted in 2012 that

Israel had “hypnotized” the world. (She later apologized for this.) Unfortunately, I’ve also heard

progressive Christians make these types of statements, alluding to some illusive Jewish scheming

plot. Jewish author Bari Weiss notes that such statements are often made innocently, with

confusion as to why Jewish readers would interpret this statement as part of a historic antisemitic

portrayal of Jews. But she writes that “The conspiracy theory of the Jew as the hypnotic

conspirator, the duplicitous manipulator, the sinister puppeteer is one with ancient roots and a

bloody history.” She points out that there was no “hypnosis” at all. In fact, there was wide

denouncement of Israel’s attack on Gaza in 2012 both in the news media and at the United

Nations. Many Jewish organizations point out that the UN has focused on Israel more than any

other country. Given the relatively low number of casualties in Israel and Palestine

(approximately 100,000 over 100 years) given the vast human rights violations and much larger

death tolls in other countries, this is difficult to understand.

Other progressive Christians use antisemitic tropes that implicate Jews in killing Jesus. Some

Jews point to the annual “Christ at the Checkpoint” conference that poses Palestinians as

symbols of Jesus, persecuted by Jewish soldiers at the checkpoint. Palestinians do suffer at

checkpoints. And Israeli policy often seems intentionally to humiliate and traumatize

Palestinians trying to get to work or to see their families on the other side of the separation wall.

But it is possible to both speak for justice for Palestinian rights and freedoms without relying on

14

antisemitic tropes that seem to suggest again that Jews killed Jesus, or that deny that Jesus was

Jewish.

In order to avoid stumbling into antisemitic themes, progressive Christians need to learn about

the history of antisemitism, and to recognize that clumsy and offensive narratives that trigger

historic trauma are counterproductive. Again, the “Understanding Antisemitism” resource is an

important resource for progressive Christians. Instead of prompting change and reflection, they

prompt defensiveness and build even greater walls to the progressive Christians who appear to

threaten Jewish lives and dignity.

6. Some Progressive Christians dismiss Jewish concerns for safety.

Some progressive Christians seem to dismiss Jewish security concerns. Some suggest Israel has

such overwhelming military power that they should have no real security fears. Progressive

Christians rarely address Iranian, Hezbollah, or Hamas threats to destroy Israel, even though

these threats are real and significant. The rockets from Gaza and Lebanon into Israeli territory

are fairly regular. While Israel’s military may indeed be strong in comparison to these threats,

that is not a reason to suggest Jewish people in Israel should not be fearful. Even if there were no

current security concerns, Jewish history makes it understandable that Jews would carry

lingering fears that others would seek their destruction again. Jewish people often note that the

absence of addressing threats to Jews, particularly in progressive Christian websites and

programs, is viewed as part of a much longer history of Christian persecution of Jews.

7. Some Progressive Christians apply a double standard to the ethic of enemy love

There is a popular children’s story among progressive Christians, one of Aesop’s Fables, called

The Sun and the Wind. The sun and the wind compete to see which one is most powerful. They

have a competition to see which one can make a man walking alone take his coat off. The wind

howls and beats the man, but this only makes the man pull his coat tighter around him. The sun

shines its warmth on the man, and the man takes off his coat in the heat. T he sun wins the

competition.

Like this ancient fable, progressive Christians have been vocal supporters of Jesus’ unpopular

message of the power of love to transform. Jesus taught to love enemies and those with whom

we disagree. In “God’s Security Strategy” loving enemies is both moral and strategic; it is an

effective way to bring about change. In Vietnam, Afghanistan, Rwanda, North and South Korea

and many other major conflict, Mennonites and Quaker peacemaking efforts are in contact with

all sides of the conflict and make a concerted effort to reach out to the side portrayed as the

“enemy,” to understand them so that they can work for a just peace. When Mennonites and

Quakers hosted former Iranian president Ahmadinejad for dinner after the UN General

Assembly, some touted it as an expression of enemy love. Jewish leaders widely condemned the

legitimacy such a meeting conveyed on a leader who has openly expressed Holocaust denial and

genocidal threats against the Jewish state, and have taken note that these Christians boycott Israel

while hosting Iranian leaders for dinner.

15

The ethic of enemy love and dialogue with those we disagree with does not seem to apply to

Jews and Israelis. Some Mennonites refuse to form relationships with Jews or even have an

honest dialogue with Jews. They justify not talking to Jewish Israelis because it might appear to

normalize Israeli policy toward Palestinians. Why is there a double standard in applying this

ethic to Iran and Israel. Why does dining with Ahmadinejad not normalize persecution of women

and minorities in Iran or its threats to Israel?

I work in the field of peacebuilding, where our professional ethics compel us to listen to all sides

of a conflict. This stems from Jesus teaching to love enemies, for there may be no clearer way to

love enemies than to listen to them and seek to understand. Yet when I wrote a blog on how I

was personally transformed by listening to hundreds of Jewish Israelis, some progressive

Mennonites began calling for a boycott against me. They argued that the university could not ask

them to read a book by me, since anything I wrote was polluted with my willingness to listen to

Jews, which they saw as normalizing Israeli policy.

Some of the dialogue programs between Israelis and Palestinians has been rightly criticized for

not leading to structural changes. And many Palestinians and their progressive Christian

supporters now participate in a boycott of any Israeli-Palestinian dialogue as part of what is

known as the “Anti-Normalization Movement.” Some in the Anti-Normalization Movement

have threatened and used violence against Palestinians involved even in social change-oriented

dialogue with Jews.

Dialogue is an important element in acknowledging the humanity of others.

1. In dialogue, we learn about how others see the world. This offers new information and an

ability to analyze the situation from multiple points of view.

2. In dialogue, we have a chance to tell others how their actions impact us. This leads to

changes, at least at the personal level.

3. In dialogue, people build relationships. When there is a crisis, people who know each

other can communicate with each other. These gestures of humanity are important,

particularly when all sides are dehumanizing others.

Even if dialogue is not the single solution to the problem, it is part of the solution. Identifying its

limitations and problems is essential. Suggesting it is only a tool of oppression is foolish. Any

path to justice and peace will include dialogue as part of the solution. There is no example of

social change happening without channels of dialogue between the various sides.

8. Some progressive Christians state that boycott, divestment, and sanction (BDS) of

Israel is the main way Western Christians should relate to Jews.

The Kairos Palestine document by Palestinian Christians calls for Western Christians to offer

“loving and nonviolent resistance” to Jewish Israelis in the form of BDS: The Boycott,

Divestment and Sanction of Israel. The three stated goals of BDS include ending occupation,

removing the wall, and allowing return of refugees. Most Palestinians view BDS as a legitimate,

nonviolent form of struggle against oppression necessary to force Israel and its supporters to

respect Palestinian human rights. There are good reasons to support BDS given that there is no

16

peace process, no hope for a political settlement, Israeli occupation of the West Bank has been

expanding, the siege in Gaza is worsening, and 160 Palestinian organizations are calling for

support for BDS. But in my article outlining the Pros and Cons of BDS, I analyze the many

problems and critiques of BDS. Many Jews can agree with the goals of ending the occupation

and siege and many even support a boycott of settlements in the West Bank. The Jewish peace

group Gush Shalom began the first boycott of the settlements. However, progressive Christians

have been unwilling to hear and grapple with Jewish responses and concerns to BDS.

First, progressive Christians have not responded to anti-occupation Jewish groups that oppose

BDS because it does not affirm a shared future. Most Jews view BDS as a call to destroy the

state of Israel and to remove Jews. They point to language on the BDS website that paints all of

Israel as settler colonialism, not just the settlements in the West Bank. This is seen as

delegitimizing any Jewish presence in the region, painting all Jews as white colonialists rather

than as refugees or survivors and ignoring the Mizrahi and Sephardic majority in Israel with

Middle Eastern and African origins. They also point to language demanding a return of all

Palestinian refugees, even though research suggests many would prefer restitution and not return,

reducing Jewish fears of a demographic threat. Some Palestinian leaders and founders of BDS,

such as Omar Barghouti insist that BDS does not aim to destroy the Israeli state. (Barghouti

2011, 16). But there are other statements on record that BDS supporters do want to destroy the

state of Israel. Anti-occupation Jewish groups have pressed BDS leaders to clarify their intent of

BDS.

The Jewish peace group J Street that has supported calls for a Palestinian state and an end to

occupation asserts the following: “The Global BDS Movement does not… distinguish between

opposition to the existence of Israel itself and opposition to the occupation of the territory

beyond the Green Line” (also known as the West Bank). Repeated calls to clarify the goals of

BDS have not been answered with language that would address these concerns. J Street clarifies:

“We do not oppose boycott, divestment, or sanctions initiatives that explicitly support a two-state

solution, recognize Israel’s right to exist, and focus only on occupied territory beyond the Green

Line. These kinds of initiatives are different than those advocated and initiated by the Global

BDS Movement.” J Street has supported the right for people to join BDS, even though they

disagree with it, and has opposed legislation in the US to make BDS illegal. All of these Jewish

groups, including Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), support the rights for boycotts of the Jewish

settlements in the West Bank. But only JVP supports the BDS movement, which supports a

boycott of all of Israel and all Israeli individuals or groups with any ties to state institutions. And

all Jewish peace groups support a just peace where both Jews and Palestinians continue to live in

the region.

Second, progressive Christians have not acknowledged that BDS serves as a trauma trigger for

many Jewish people. Western Christians have used antisemitic boycotts against Jews for

centuries. From a Jewish point of view, there is continuity between Western Christians’ as well

as Muslim historic and current use of boycotts against them. This is understandable. Mennonites,

for example, already had a filter on church investments to avoid funding corporations involved in

military activities. This filter applied to investments globally, not just to Israel. When

Mennonites passed a resolution to boycott and divest from Jewish settlements, this actually did

not change anything. There was no prior investment to divest from. And the authors of the

17

resolution had added a footnote that this action in the resolution did not involve a formal

endorsement of BDS. Yet some Mennonite activists, wanting to portray a win for BDS, released

press releases to that effect.

Third, some progressive Christians emphasize that BDS is the “only” tactic that can work to

bring about change. There are literally hundreds of nonviolent tactics. Relatively few exert

punishment on the adversary. Most nonviolent tactics require sacrifices from those protesting,

not those being protested. When progressive Christians argue “only BDS can bring change” they

are sending a bizarre message about the power of punishment as more effective than other

nonviolent tactics that might better accomplish the goals of truth telling and justice.

Fourth , Quakers in particular have taken up a mixed message on BDS, not acknowledging many

Jews support a boycott of the settlements, but not a boycott of all of Israel and all Israeli

individuals connected to the state. British Quakers state that they practice a boycott only of the

settlements, and do not embrace the full agenda of BDS. But US Quakers offer full support to the

entire BDS agenda and published a guide called “Engaging Critics of BDS: A resource for

activists” that severely distorts Jewish concerns and prints outright falsehoods about BDS. The

Quakers offer no citations or references to Jewish authors or organizations and seem to be

unaware of the actual concerns about BDS. For example, the pamphlet argues that BDS

encourages substantive dialogue with Jews. But there have been many examples of protests and

threats against Palestinians who are in dialogue with Israelis on a wide range of social change-

related issues. Palestinian leaders have even imprisoned Palestinians that it interprets are

violating the BDS and anti-normalization framework that opposes dialogue between Palestinians

and Jews. The pamphlet also argues that BDS is not applied against individuals. That is also

untrue. BDS does call for boycotts and bans of individuals and has been used against Israeli

LGBTQ advocates, against Israeli peacemakers, and against Israeli social change-oriented

theatre companies. Any individual who has received any money or support from an Israeli

institution is a target. In a November 2018 radio program about their BDS pamphlet, three

Quakers presented what they have misunderstood as the arguments against BDS. No Jews were

included to voice their own legitimate concerns. Happening just weeks after the massacre at the

synagogue in Pittsburgh, it is perplexing why these Quakers could not see the connection

between silencing the voices of Jews and letting Jews speak for themselves in their programs and

publications.

Fifth, there is little evidence that BDS is working to change Israeli policy. Ironically, both right

wing Israelis and BDS leaders are the only ones suggesting that BDS is working. Right wing

Israelis want to spread fear among Israelis that they must stick together against a world against

them. And BDS leaders want to applaud successes in getting more groups to sign onto BDS,

even though this does not translate into success in their goals of ending the occupation. BDS is

succeeding in gaining global support, in part because of support from progressive Christians.

However, from a strategic point of view, BDS is not creating any significant change within

Israel. Occupation and the siege in Gaza are worsening, not improving. BDS is dividing the

Jewish and Palestinian peace movements that want an end to occupation. And BDS is

emboldening the Israeli right and creating further animosity between Israelis and those who

support Palestinians. If anything, BDS seems to be making change less likely, not more likely.

18

Other punishment-based social change strategies are also faltering. Counterterrorism uses

punishment to attempt to hinder the Taliban in Afghanistan. But punishment is having the

opposite effect: the Taliban is stronger today than in 2001, primarily because a punishment-based

strategy reinforces the sense of danger and humiliation from the US, and this is rocket fuel for

recruitment and revenge in an endless cycle of violence.

9. Some Progressive Christian’s demand for an end to occupation is not accompanied

with calls for a “shared future” or recognizing the state of Israel.

Just as the BDS movement does not articulate a vision of a shared future, so too do many

progressive Christians fail to articulate a vision for Jews and Palestinians living together in their

own documents, study guides and resolutions. Jews who read progressive Christian websites and

texts about Israel and Palestine on MennoPin, QPin, or the Presbyterian Israel/Palestine Mission

Network note that there is little affirmation of Jewish people staying in the region and little

attention to a “shared future” where Jews and Palestinians both live with equal rights and

freedoms.

10. Some progressive Christians single out Israel but ignore other situations of injustice

that they have more control over.

Progressive Christians denounce Israel far more than any other country. Jews have noted that

Israel is often singled out, and that this double standard in judgements is an expression of

antisemitism.

For example, in 2017, Mennonites in the Mennonite Church USA conference passed only one

resolution, a resolution denouncing both antisemitism and Israel’s occupation of Palestine. By

what criteria do North American Mennonites write and pass resolutions, placing emphasis on

Israeli wrongdoing rather than their own, or those of other countries? It was strongly condemned

by most Jewish groups who noted the focus on Israel and that double standard. For example, why

has there been less attention to the following:

1. Those conflicts where Mennonites are the settler colonialists. Mennonites are settler

colonialists in Mexico, Belize, Chaco, US and Canada that continue to this day to

dispossess Indigenous people from their land. While some Mennonites have apologized

for taking Indigenous land in Pennsylvania, there are far wider implications of Mennonite

complicity with Indigenous dispossession that need to be addressed.

1. Those conflicts where Mennonites are complicit with violence done to make the products

we use, such as Mennonite-owned mining corporations in Canada. In Canada,

Mennonite-owned mining companies such as Northern Dynasty are dispossessing

Indigenous people of their land right now – but Mennonites have refused to denounce this

action or to organize a boycott or any type of collective action against Mennonite leaders

of the global mining industry. Mennonite narratives of Mennonite violence toward

Indigenous people is sympathetic, recognizing Mennonite trauma and refugee status in

Canada. The comparison of how Mennonites treat their own trauma and the maltreatment

19

of First Nations in Canada is absolutely striking when compared with Mennonite

narratives of Jewish trauma and treatment of Palestinians.

1. Those conflicts where many Mennonites are affected. More Mennonites live in the

Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) than any other country outside of the US and

Canada. And five million people, including many Congolese Mennonites, have died

from civil war in DRC.

2. Those conflicts that are killing far more people like the war in Syria, Yemen, DRC, or

the US occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan. Approximately 100,000 Palestinians have

died in the last 100 years because of the conflict with Israel. In contrast, half a million

Syrians have died in the last seven years, and nearly 14 million people in Yemen are

on the verge of starvation because of Saudi Arabia’s policy. The scale of suffering

does not compare.

3. Those conflicts that are supported by our taxes. Israel receives over $3 billion in US

aid each year, far more than any other country. This may explain why US Mennonites

focus on Israel, but it does not explain the focus by Canadian Mennonites on Israel.

Furthermore, US taxpayers have spent over $6 trillion on the US military occupation

in Afghanistan and Iraq, but there is no boycott of US goods called for by Mennonite

institutions and very little pressure on the enormous US military industrial complex

and its impact on people all over the world, all supported by US taxes.

Principles for Talking about Israel and Palestine

While some progressive Christians insist that they are attempting to support peace and justice in

Israel and Palestine, the impact of their work creates obstacles, not pathways, to social change.

We must advocate for both Palestinian rights and Jewish rights, no matter the political outcome.

Jews and Palestinians and Bedouins and Druze can live with equal rights and freedoms in one

state, two states, or a creative two states, one nation confederation.

But how we talk about the current situation matters. Trauma-sensitive narratives are necessary to

reduce fear and polarization. Trauma, fear, and anxiety create obstacles to compassion, critical

thinking, and creative problem solving. Trauma sensitivity can improve cognitive functioning,

and in turn contribute to peacebuilding.

Social change requires building coalitions across the lines of conflict. A strategic nonviolent

campaign to end occupation requires dialogue and coalition building between Jewish peace

groups and Palestinian change groups. But that won’t happen as long as Palestinians and some

progressive Christian allies refuse to dialogue with Jews, while most anti-occupation, peace-

supporting Jews believe BDS is calling for the destruction of the state of Israel and a removal of

Jews from the region. Narrative trauma triggers create obstacles to building strategic coalitions.

20

Progressive Christians can do better. We can work with Jews and Palestinians to build a more

effective social change movement. Some narrative principles for how we talk about Jews and

Palestinians could help.

1. Acknowledge and study the history of both Jews and Palestinians to understand how

they perceive the current situation, and what they see as the obstacles to a just peace.

2. Recognize the significant generational trauma for both Jews and Palestinians and

acknowledge the role of Western Christians in the suffering of both groups.

3. Acknowledge the importance of the land for both Jews and Palestinians.

4. Acknowledge the right to self-determination for both Jews and Palestinians and that

both have a right to a state that protects and observes their cultural and religious beliefs.

5. Acknowledge the power imbalance on all sides. Progressive Christians emphasize the

power imbalance between Israel and the Palestinians. But globally Christians and

Muslims have far more power than Jews, and persecution of Jews is widespread.

6. Recognize positive aspects of both Israeli and Palestinian society. Jews and

Palestinians both have rich cultures and make many contributions to the world. They are

more than their conflict. It is unhelpful and discriminatory to speak only in negative

terms about either Israel or Palestine, as societies, as these represent the people and

culture as well as the policies, however flawed.

7. Recognize the need for safety and human rights for both Palestinians and Jews.

End Note: Responses to Critics

Many people have written me about my articles. My responses to some of their arguments are

found in the text above. Here are a few responses to their questions and criticisms.

“This is simple, just say occupation is wrong. You make it seem complicated Lisa.”

I agree: occupation is wrong, and it is simple to say that. But finding a solution is not simple. It is

a fantasy to think that punishment of Israel and Israelis is going to lead to a simple solution of

ending the occupation. The solution is complicated, and it requires all of us to listen to complex

narratives on all sides. That is not simple.

“Some Palestinians don’t like what you are writing Lisa, so that means you are

undermining their cause.”

21

A young Swiss-Palestinian man who was my student at one time suggested that I should stop

writing and “just listen to Palestinians” and do what they ask me to do. I am an advocate of

listening to local people. I’ve spent most of my life listening. As a woman, I often did not travel

to countries as an “expert” like my male colleagues with their beards and male entitlements. I

traveled as a researcher and I listened to people. I have published several books about listening to

local people. So this young man knew he was pushing a button by invoking a principle that I

think is very important. He was arguing that I should accept what he thinks, as one Palestinian,

rather than listen to other Palestinians or Jewish people.

There are a lot of reasons to listen to people. But listening does not require agreeing with

everything local people say. When I lived in Kenya in 2002, some Kenyans asked me to support

a US military operation in Kenya to rid the country of Al Shabaab. In Afghanistan, local people

asked me to support US occupation there in their fight against the Taliban.

From listening to Palestinians and Bedouins in the West Bank and Gaza for three months in

2017, I heard stories of suffering. I witnessed a situation that is getting worse, not better. I came

to understand why many Palestinians do not want to have any dialogue with Israelis. I appreciate

and respect their decision. But I also listened to Palestinian strategists who have a very different

understanding of how change is going to happen; and in their view there is a lot of work we can

do first to understand the narratives and traumas of all sides.

“If both Jews and Palestinians criticize your writing, that means you are a failure.”

The same Palestinian American student told me I had failed to make the argument to listen to

both sides. But the people I met in Palestine and Israel doing the most important work were

considered traitors by their own communities. People who build peace often hold this title

because they work against the status quo. Peacebuilding is not a popularity contest.

Peacebuilders have commitments to ethics, and to strategy. If listening to people on all sides of a

conflict makes one unpopular, then so be it.